A cross-validity comparison of rating-based and choice-based conjoint analysis models

By William L. Moore. 2004

127 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Marketing

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/38c3d6d330b824d73853486f87898001fbfb13a0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. Kenneth Train
2. Moshe E. Ben-Akiva
3. Daniel McFadden
4. Stephane Hess
5. Chandra R. Bhat
6. William H. Greene
7. David A. Hensher
8. Joan L. Walker

In General Decision Sciences

1. Kenneth Train
2. Daniel McFadden
3. Moshe E. Ben-Akiva
4. Stephane Hess
5. Caspar G. Chorus

In Marketing

1. Kenneth Train
2. Moshe E. Ben-Akiva
3. Daniel McFadden
4. Chandra R. Bhat
5. Joan L. Walker
6. Stephane Hess
7. William H. Greene
8. David A. Hensher

Citations in the corpus

• Estimating Aggregate Consumer Preferences from Online Product Reviews (2010, unknown): “Moore (2004), for example, demonstrates in a traditional conjoint setting that an HB rating-based model may provide higher hit rates than both an OLS rating-based model and latent segment models.”
• Foundations of Stated Preference Elicitation: Consumer Behavior and Choice-based Conjoint Analysis (2019, result): “Moore (2004) compares CBC with other elicitation and forecasting methods, and concludes that CBC data analyzed using the methods described in this paper out-performed the alternatives.”